Santosh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 2447 of 2025

Santosh Kumar		.....Applicant(s)
	Versus
State of U.P. and Another		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Swetashwa Verma	Agarwal, Yash Raj
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.
Court No.- 69

¶4

HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

¶5

Heard Sri Swetashwa Agarwal, counsel for the applicant and Sri N.K. Sharma, learned AGA for the State.

¶6

The applicant was granted interim anticipatory bail vide order dated 18.4.2025 passed by this Court. The order is quoted herein below:-

¶7

"1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶8

2. The present application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant in Case Crime No.02 of 2019, under sections 167, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Kalyanpur, District Kanpur Nagar.

¶9

3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. At the relevant time, the applicant was posted as Project Officer in the office of UPSIDC, Ghaziabad. Further, similarly placed co-accused Rajesh Kumar Chauhan and Shabbir Ahmad have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide orders dated 5.3.2025 and 09.04.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application Nos. 1663 of 2025 and 2317 of 2025 respectively. The applicant claims parity. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. It is next submitted that the investigation is going on and the applicant has apprehension of his arrest in the above mentioned case.

¶10

NABAIL No. 2447 of 2025

¶11

2

¶12

4. Matter requires consideration.

¶13

5. Learned AGA has accepted notice on behalf of the opposite party no.1.

¶14

6. Issue notice to opposite party no.2 returnable at an early date.

¶15

7. The opposite parties are granted three weeks' time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if any, may be filed within one week thereafter.

¶16

8. List and connect this case along with Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2317 of 2025 on 28.5.2025 in the additional cause list.

¶17

9. Till the next date of listing or till the submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., whichever is earlier, in the event of arrest, the applicant Santosh Kumar be released on interim anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

¶18

(i) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

¶19

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶20

(iii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if he has passport, the same shall be deposited by him before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned.

¶21

10. In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of interim anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶22

11. The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation of the present case in accordance with law without being prejudiced by any observation made by this Court while considering the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶23

12. The applicant is directed to produce a copy of this order before the S.S.P./S.P. concerned within ten days from today, who shall ensure the compliance of present order."

¶24

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Identically placed co-

¶25

NABAIL No. 2447 of 2025

¶26

3

¶27

accused Pradeep Kumar, Yash Pal Singh and Rajesh Kumar Chauhan have been granted anticipatory bail by this court vide orders dated 15.2.2024, 12.3.2024 and 5.3.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application Nos.8055 of 2023, 1528 of 2024 and 1663 of 2025 respectively. The applicant claims parity. The necessary ingredients to constitute the alleged offences are not made out against the applicant. Further pursuant to the interim order dated 18.4.2025 the applicant had furnished bail bonds before the S.H.O. concerned and had joined the investigation. The applicant has not violated or misused the liberty of interim bail. In case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶28

Learned AGA for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶29

Having regard to the submissions made, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicant and the fact that identically placed co-accused Pradeep Kumar, Yash Pal Singh and Rajesh Kumar Chauhan have been granted anticipatory bail by this court; the applicant had joined the investigation; no violation of conditions or misuse of liberty of interim anticipatory bail has been pointed out by the learned AGA; without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled for anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial.

¶30

In the event of arrest, the applicant- Santosh Kumar, involved in Case Crime No. 02 of 2019, under sections 167, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., P.S. Kalyanpur, District Kanpur Nagar, be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a fresh personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶31

(i) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation;

¶32

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts

¶33

NABAIL No. 2447 of 2025

¶34

4

¶35

to the court or to any police officer;

¶36

(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country during the pendency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶37

(iv) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.

¶38

(v) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court.

¶39

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶40

In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same.

¶41

The application stands disposed of.

¶42

September 16, 2025 S.S.

¶43

(Vivek Varma,J.)

¶44

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Santosh Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases